Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id NAA20608 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 23 Jan 2001 13:59:29 GMT From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on... Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 01:07:25 +1100 Message-ID: <LPBBICPHCJJBPJGHGMCIGEBFCNAA.ddiamond@ozemail.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <200101231256.HAA07328@mail1.lig.bellsouth.net> X-RBL-Warning: (orbs.dorkslayers.com) 203.2.192.81 is listed by dorkslayers.com Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
> Of Joe E. Dees
> Sent: Tuesday, 23 January 2001 11:57
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...
>
>
> From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au>
> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
> Subject: RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...
> Date sent: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 23:32:21 +1100
> Send reply to: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
> [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
> > > Of William Benzon
> > > Sent: Tuesday, 23 January 2001 4:40
> > > To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> > > Subject: Re: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...
> > >
> > >
> > > on 1/22/01 9:27 AM, Wade T.Smith at wade_smith@harvard.edu wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 01/22/01 08:08, Joe E. Dees said this-
> > > >
> > > >> I was
> > > >> correct when I branded you as an unthinking zombic memebot of
> > > >> the lowest order, in cognitive thrall to pernicious error.
> > > >
> > > > Hell, nobody's perfect.
> > > >
> > > > IMHO, Chris is an (archetypal) astrologer, and everything
> he says will
> > > > work in the proper context and setting, there being a very
> nice mix of
> > > > generality and specificity to all of it.
> > > >
> > > > I'm willing to enjoy what I see probable about it all.
> > > >
> > > > But, in the wider cases of Theories of Everything, how many
> wrongs do
> > > > make a right?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Such theories come in two flavors: Those that achieve generality
> > > by ignoring
> > > details and those that achieve it by paying close attention to novel
> > > patterns of detail. The former are worthless, the latter are valuable.
> > >
> >
> > damn right. The problem is that once you have been through the
> detail it is
> > hard to communicate to those who have not or dont want to.
> >
> > Imagine the 'problem' for Joe when he realises (if ever) how it is that
> > Astrology is believed at a base level since it develops from fundamental
> > metaphorcations of fundamental meanings. It is a metaphor and a
> good one in
> > that it is founded on dichotomisation, as is maths, physics etc
> etc Problems
> > arise when these disciplines are taken too literally; pure
> mathematics can
> > relate to total illusion but it is 'respected'. Astrology can
> relate to REAL
> > social processes but because the literal-minded cannot identify
> the metaphor
> > so it is 'rubbished'.
> >
> Idiot. Astrology is embraced, as is racism, sexism, ageism or
> homophobia, because it is a short-circuit way to respond to
> situations, a heuristic, or rule-of-thumb, that allows one to react
> without the annoying necessity of thought, much as Chris
> embraces ultra-reductionistic binary simplisms as the exclusive be-
> all and end-all of everything, and ignores logic and examples that
> refute such a nonview. It doesn't work worth a flip, but it IS
> efficient. All you have to do is pigeonhole people into categories
> based upon complexion or birthdate or gender or gender orientation
> or age, and you don't have to go through the difficulty of considering
> and responding to them as individuals. The constellational
> correlations of astrology were set down more than 3000 years ago;
> we have advanced two constellational "houses" since then, but the
> correlative modifications have not been made in the astrological
> dogma. That would require thought, and the acknowledgement that
> the earth perspective on the sky changes with time.
you are incapable of 'getting it' arent you. Above is expression
biased-packed with totally useless information, as if you are trying to
express you knowledge of it. If that is the case then you knowledge is at
best 'feeble'.
From the template context, the point I make is the VALUE THAT PEOPLE GET
FROM IT UNCONSCIOUSLY. IOW they can 'feel' the 'truth' of it despite your
attacks and that feeling fuels their defences. the SOURCE of those feelings
is in the underlying links to the template patterns; the words are part of
the lexicon of terms tied to the discipline. The discipline is a
particularisation used to describe persona types using associations with the
heavens as a link. Metaphor was then taken literally. The words, the MANY
words, arbitrary selection, point to generally INVARIANT feelings. it is
these FEELINGS that 'resonate'; give us the sense of meaning.
IOW the logic element expresses itself, i.e. dont care what P and Q are but
if 'if P then Q' then 'ok'. The problems come in the TESTING of the model
and that is where it has problems when taken literally. Much of Astrology is
used purely for socialisation. People go to see the Astrologer for a bit of
a talk using rich symbolisms; metaphors etc. A world you are obviously out
of touch with.
You interpretation of Astrology is fundamentally incorrect in that, as I
have repeatedly stated, if taken literally,(as you do with obviously no
indepth analysis of it), and that included birthtimes etc then it is
meaningless in a 'scientific' context. BUT when taken as a typology so you
will find 'Cancer' personalities even though they are born in 'Aries'. The
PERSONA distinctions are workable. You Idiot. (Gauquilin's work was
interesting though. Links to development processes being influenced by
gravitational/EM influences such that the resulting 'twists and turns' in
organic development influence persona expression! However I recall his
statistics had 'problems' (?)).
Chris.
------------------
Chris Lofting
websites:
http://www.eisa.net.au/~lofting
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond
List Owner: http://www.egroups.com/group/semiosis
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 23 2001 - 14:01:23 GMT